Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Expanding Deserts, Falling Water Tables and Toxins Driving People from Homes
WASHINGTON - People do not normally leave their homes, their families, and their communities unless they have no other option. Yet as environmental stresses mount, we can expect to see a growing number of environmental refugees. Rising seas and increasingly devastating storms grab headlines, but expanding deserts, falling water tables, and toxic waste and radiation are also forcing people from their homes.
Advancing deserts are now on the move almost everywhere. The Sahara desert, for example, is expanding in every direction. As it advances northward, it is squeezing the populations of Morocco, Tunisia, and Algeria against the Mediterranean coast.
The Sahelian region of Africa - the vast swath of savannah that separates the southern Sahara desert from the tropical rainforests of central Africa - is shrinking as the desert moves southward. As the desert invades Nigeria, Africa's most populous country, from the north, farmers and herders are forced southward, squeezed into a shrinking area of productive land.
A 2006 U.N. conference on desertification in Tunisia projected that by 2020 up to 60 million people could migrate from sub-Saharan Africa to North Africa and Europe.
In Iran, villages abandoned because of spreading deserts or a lack of water number in the thousands. In Brazil, some 250,000 square miles of land are affected by desertification, much of it concentrated in the country's northeast.
In Mexico, many of the migrants who leave rural communities in arid and semiarid regions of the country each year are doing so because of desertification. Some of these environmental refugees end up in Mexican cities, others cross the northern border into the United States. U.S. analysts estimate that Mexico is forced to abandon 400 square miles of farmland to desertification each year.
In China, desert expansion has accelerated in each successive decade since 1950. Desert scholar Wang Tao reports that over the last half-century or so some 24,000 villages in northern and western China have been abandoned either entirely or partly because of desert expansion.
China is heading for a ‘Dust Bowl’ like the one that forced more than 2 million "Okies" to leave their land in the U.S. in the 1930s. But the dust bowl forming in China is much larger and so is the population: China’s migration may measure in the tens of millions. And as a U.S. embassy report entitled ‘Grapes of Wrath in Inner Mongolia’ noted, "unfortunately, China's twenty-first century ‘Okies’ have no California to escape to - at least not in China."
With the vast majority of the 2.3 billion people projected to be added to the world by 2050 being born in countries where water tables are falling, water refugees are likely to become commonplace. They will be most common in arid and semiarid regions where populations are outgrowing the water supply and sinking into hydrological poverty.
Villages in northwestern India are being abandoned as aquifers are depleted and people can no longer find water. Millions of villagers in northern and western China and in northern Mexico may have to move because of a lack of water.
Thus far the evacuations resulting from water shortages have been confined to villages, but eventually whole cities might have to be relocated, such as Sana’a, the capital of Yemen, and Quetta, the capital of Pakistan’s Baluchistan province.
Sana’a, a fast-growing city of more than 2 million people, is literally running out of water. Quetta, originally designed for 50,000 people, now has a population exceeding 1 million - all of whom depend on 2,000 wells pumping water from what is believed to be a fossil aquifer. In the words of one study assessing its water prospect, Quetta will soon be "a dead city".
Two other semiarid Middle Eastern countries that are suffering from water shortages are Syria and Iraq. Both are beginning to reap the consequences of over-pumping their aquifers - namely irrigation wells going dry. In Syria, these trends have forced the abandonment of 160 villages. And a U.N. report estimates that more than 100,000 people in northern Iraq have been uprooted because of water shortages.
A final category of environmental refugee has appeared only in the last 50 years or so: people who are trying to escape toxic waste or dangerous radiation levels.
During the late 1970s, Love Canal - a small town in upstate New York, part of which was built on top of a toxic waste disposal site - made national and international headlines. Beginning in August 1978, families were relocated at government expense and reimbursed for their homes at market prices. By October 1980, a total of 950 families had been permanently relocated. A few years later, the federal government arranged for the permanent evacuation and relocation of all 2,000 residents of Times Beach, Missouri, after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency discovered dioxin levels well above the public health standards.
While the U.S. has relocated two communities because of health-damaging pollutants, the identification of more than 450 "cancer villages" in China suggests the need to evacuate hundreds of communities. China’s Ministry of Health statistics show that cancer is now the country’s leading cause of death, and with little pollution control, whole communities near chemical factories are suffering from unprecedented rates of cancer. Young people are leaving for the city in droves, for jobs and possibly for better health. Yet many others are too sick or too poor to leave.
Another infamous source of environmental refugees is the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Kiev, which exploded in April 1986. This started a powerful fire that lasted for 10 days. Massive amounts of radioactive material were spewed into the atmosphere, showering communities in the region with heavy doses of radiation. As a result, the residents of the nearby town of Pripyat and several other communities in Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia were evacuated - requiring the resettlement of 350,400 people.
In 1992, six years after the accident, Belarus was devoting 20 percent of its national budget to resettlement and the many other costs associated with the accident.
When a devastating earthquake and tsunami hit Japan in March 2011, the ensuing nuclear crisis at the badly damaged Fukushima Daiichi power plant forced tens of thousands of people from their homes. Whether they will be able to return or will become permanently displaced is a question that remains unanswered.
Separating out the geneses of today’s refugees is not always easy. Often the environmental and economic stresses that drive migration are closely intertwined. But whatever the reason for leaving home, people are taking increasingly desperate measures. Some of their stories are heartrending beyond belief.
As a general matter, environmental refugees are migrating from poor countries to rich ones, from Africa, Asia, and Latin America to North America and Europe. Some of the largest flows will be across national borders and they are likely to be illegal. The potentially massive movement of people across national boundaries is already affecting some countries. The U.S. is erecting a fence along the border with Mexico. The Mediterranean Sea is now routinely patrolled by naval vessels trying to intercept the small boats of African migrants bound for Europe. India, with a steady stream of migrants from Bangladesh and the prospect of millions more to come, is building a 10-foot-high fence along their shared border.
Maybe it is time for governments to consider whether it might not be cheaper and far less painful in human terms to treat the causes of migration rather than merely respond to it. This means working with developing countries to restore their economy’s natural support systems - the soils, the water tables, the grasslands, the forests - and it means accelerating the shift to smaller families to help people break out of poverty.
Treating symptoms instead of causes is not good medicine. Nor is it good public policy.



23 Comments so far
Show AllWe must, of course, keep undesirables from contaminating our society and the world. I suggest a 30 ft wall, topped with razor wire and electronic surveillance constructed around the White House, Congress, and the Pentagon. We could feed them cooked peas.
The Onion had an article a few months back
about how the Mexicans were erecting a fence
along the border with the U.S., in order to keep
all the American A-holes out.
hahaha
Don't worry our society is already contaminated.
Look at Washington DC.
When everyone is an environmental refugee, there will be noplace to move away from the devastation to. Think it can't happen? I hope you're right.
Treating the causes would mean depopulating the earth by more than half of the humans currently in existence (how is that to be done without widespread suffering and misery?) and reengineering the entire production consumption systems to operate differently. I'm afraid symptomatic relief is all that is available to us, but I hope I'm wrong.
Paranoid Pessimist wrote:
> Treating the causes would mean depopulating the earth by more than half of the humans currently in existence.
The wealthy owners of the US government have in mind an economic depopulation plan designed to take the population down to two billion. It's now a race between them and Mother Earth. But between them both, it's inevitable.
> how is that to be done without widespread suffering and misery?
It can't be done without widespread suffering and misery, but it can be done.
Here in the US, all that has to be done is to, in the name of saving the economic system, eliminate Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income, Disability, Food Stamps, Unemployment Insurance, and all those other expensive safety-net programs, and the poor, the ill, and the elderly who are dependent on them will have to just go away and die quietly.
Unthinkable you say? HEY, isn't that exactly what has been proposed by those who, in the name of the economy and patriotism, are trying to down-size the government?
Even euthanasia can't be implemented because the austerity mandate from the wealthy owners of the US government precludes spending any money on the lower classes.
I've been harping on this for some time now. Ever since it became clear that the agenda of the wealthy owners of the Earth was to depopulate the planet. Hardly anyone has been listening, due to the fact that it was a crime against humanity that was incomprehensible in scope. No one has ever before planned a mass murder of this magnitude.
People think it is not an option because it would cause pain and suffering, but to the wealthy, the poor, ill, and elderly are of no more importance than are the ants to the guy who mows the lawn.
BUT, just think about it for a minute. When three hundred million American are desperately searching for food and water, and the only people who have food and water are the wealthy, ensconced in their stronghold compounds, guarded by their private mercenary armies, who do you think is going to get over-run and butchered for their provisions? It's a variation on the old Willie Sutton rule: He robbed banks because that's where the money was.
MEL
Mel,
"Hardly anyone has been listening" is true of the broad mainstream culture, but the issues you raise have been raised on this website by readers for years.
That the super-rich dont give a damn....retreat into fortified compounds in walled communities...mercenary security....the poor, disabled, elderly, minorities etc. to pay the price one way or the other - yeah, I think we've discussed that around here a few times....
Kitaj wrote:
> "Hardly anyone has been listening" is true of the broad mainstream culture, but the issues you raise have been raised on this website by readers for years.
"People listening without hearing" (Paul Simon, "Sounds of Silence"). I've been listening and hearing for some while now, but STILL haven't been able to figure out what to do about it other than to, when the time is right, drown my cats, and use my .357 Magnum to end my life.
> That the super-rich don't give a damn....retreat into fortified compounds in walled communities...mercenary security....the poor, disabled, elderly, minorities etc. to pay the price one way or the other - yeah, I think we've discussed that around here a few times....
Kitaj, is there nothing other than discussing this that can be done?
I'm maintaining that when the poor, ill, and elderly are finally on the verge of starvation that there will be an orgy of chaos, but at that point it will probably be too little, too late.
Is there no way to rage against the machine before the chaotic orgy is upon us?
Please understand something. I'm NOT against the depopulation of the planet. It's not only inevitable, it's necessary for the sake of the earth.
What I AM against is that those who are screwing mother earth are the ones who are making the preemptive strike against those who want to restore efficacious methodologies and to stop the rape of this beautiful world.
I'm old and very ill, and probably won't live out the year, so fortunately am not going to have to go through what is presently already upon us. But I cannot but feel a debilitating helplessness about what I see happening. Something needs to be done. Something needs to be started that will grow into a movement that will stop the juggernaut that is presently rolling roughshod over everyone.
Voting the rascals out isn't going to work because they run the elections.
Rising up against them is little more than suicide, but since they have left suicide as the only way out, the least that could be done is take some of them with us.
There HAS to be an alternative.
MEL
Great article. Some of us on CD understand that water will become as precious as gold in future decades. And yet in so many places, it is being trashed or treated as some sort of sewage delivery system. Few species show a greater lack of foresight, an affliction too often seen in those who specifically position themselves to "run" things for mankind.
The future is now! They are already taking over the water through privatization schemes.
Siouxrose,
"Few species show a greater lack of foresight..." I agree, that's why I believe that human beings are on the fast track to extinction. I wonder if it is possible that after the majority of humans kill themselves off, the rest will learn how to live differently on this earth? ... I'm not holding my breath.
It looks as though the 21st century is going to be a very, very bad time. It may be possible to alleviate some of the coming water shortages by the use of desalinators along the coastlines, but the water will have to be sterilized and chemically cleaned as well, since, as the sea levels rise [even if only a foot or so] what will be flooded will be among the most hideous pollution in the world. There is going to be a massive die-off, and it will not be pretty. I do not see any other outcome. The aquifers in our own 'bread baskets' - S California, the MidWest - are dropping precipitously. Surface ground levels in the San Juaquin Valley have dropped over 35 feet, as the depleted aquifer beneath it settles. This entire matter is like someone cutting open an artery and considering it a small bleed. Do we laugh, cry, or kill off the perps?
Sounds like an excellent pursuit. Water reclamation/management should become as big a pursuit as was the MIC ( imagine a trillion $ a year for THIS pursuit). Forget the pursuit of oil. Pursue the water (shouldn't be hard to find, here on planet Water, I mean Earth ). We can use hydrogen for fuel, insead of gas, diesel, methane, etc... The NAWAPA program from the 1960's should be dusted off & upgraded. Soon as we get our "FDR", this should be his "TVA" for the 21st century. We can also green the desert with this new-found water supply, increasing the flora & fauna on the North American continent (countering the extinction of species).
Speaking of 'greening' the desert - Khadaffi found an aquifer in the Sahara & realizing that fresh water is even more precious than oil - especially in a desert- commissioned Libya's 'Great Man-Made River Project' that supplies 70% of Libya's fresh water [I wonder how many other aquifers are under the Sahara that can be used to turn the Sahara green again].
But then Khadaffi is just a so-called 'tyrannical madman' who allegedly wanted to KILL all Libyans - so the US, UK, France, & NATO decided he had to go!
Brown, as usual, presents a lot of important information. But, as usual, you would never know from his books, articles or speeches that there are gigantic, unimaginably wealthy and powerful entities stalking the planet and wreaking havoc, toxic pollution, destroyed communities, destroyed nations in their wake. They are the international bank criminals and their near and dear corporate partners. And they are often accompanied by military force as is plainly visible in the US assault and occupation of the oil rich Middle East. Surely Brown knows that the disaster at Love Canal didn't fall out of the sky but was produced by Hooker Chemical Company and Occidental Petroleum dumping a vile mix of toxic chemical wastes in the old Love Canal. Likewise he should know and tell his readers that the disaster at Times Beach, Missouri was produced by spreading chemical wastes containing dioxin from the Northeastern Pharmaceutical and Chemical Company. Getting big bucks from corporate sources to centrally fund his organizations like Worldwatch and now Earth Policy Institute, Brown consistently steers around any naming of names let alone any analysis of the destructive effects of corporate capitalism on the global environment. He must also know that global organizations are involved in buying or stealing water to bottle and use from near defenseless communities around the world. Likewise they partner along side some nations to buy or seize valuable farm lands by dispossessing the farmers and peasants who have often lived there for generations but without any western paper work or deeds. For a man so obviously intelligent and informed, one concludes that it is a case of deliberate blindness or worse keeping his audience misinformed so many will never realize that much of the environmental degradation has been instigated by corporate actions.
You are astute to point out Brown's glaring failure to hold anyone accountable for our bundles of ecological catastrophes. It's remarkable that an article concerned with drought and desertification avoids the elephant in the room called "global warming." Brown mentions "working with developing countries to restore their economy’s natural support systems - the soils, the water tables, the grasslands, the forests," all of which will be utterly impossible in the horn of Africa and the other areas Brown mentions so long as atmospheric CO2 continues to rise. Then he closes by decrying strategies which only treat symptoms!
We all share the blame for CO2 emissions, but the root cause could fairly be placed with the dominant economic system, based on endless growth, whose prominent philanthropists contribute to good works like Worldwatch and the Earth Policy Institute. There's a role in this system for commentators like Brown. That role is distinctly not to question the system itself.
_________________________________________
"Getting big bucks from corporate sources to centrally fund his organizations like Worldwatch and now Earth Policy Institute, Brown consistently steers around any naming of names let alone any analysis of the destructive effects of corporate capitalism on the global environment."
Yes, that's my problem with Lester also. Well said. I read him for environmental types of information, and pretty much ignore his political solutions, which are for the most part tone-deaf.
Good point, courtjester. The state of the world is a consequence of the activities of the most powerful entities, the destructive corporate giants striding the earth, but with the consent of the masses one must add. Lester Brown is representing the problem, not advocating the solution, which is appropriate, and all in all I'd say he's done a good job. He doesn't resort to smiley faces. He's not an advocate of corporate interests.
Overpopulation is a clear and present danger. No politician will champion the issue like Al Gore took up global warming, even though overpopulation is the mother of global warming, desertification, resource depletion, species extinction, environmental toxification, etc. This article is not swamped with comments. Commentators are not clamoring to make themselves heard.
This means that the problem will not be addressed, only symptoms will be recognized, such as global warming, as Paranoid Pessimist above says. It's another third rail of politics. There are aggressively stupid constituencies out there, the religious fruitcakes, who can't allow the human species to control its own destiny because it offends their aggressively stupid God. The Republican Party has been taken over by these fools and there are plenty of progressives who can't cope with abortion and are just as foolish.
We are not equipped to deal with overpopulation and we will continue to suffer the consequences, and our population will be reduced. That's a long position that any reasonable trader can feel confident about.
All Too Often the so-called liberal 'left's' 'Magic Bullet Theory' to any environmental crisis, food shortages, etc = population control [usually targeted at Black & Brown people of Africa & the so-called 3rd World]! These type folks seem to never critique the standard Westernized Economic, Political & Military System(s), nor over / mal-industrialization, over consumerism & waste, disaster capitalism & global neo-liberal so-called 'free'-market privitization [= Profitization & Corporatization] of everything including LIFE ITSELF- & in the process wanton pollution & destruction of man & the eco-sphere, nor the role of militarization & imperialism... And I could go on & on...
NO for these phony 'progressives' the problem is always TOO MANY [generally BLACK, BROWN & POOR] PEOPLE - IE: 'New Age' EUGENICS / SOCIAL DARWINISM Masquerading as Concern for the Eco-sphere! Thus presumably your 'Final Solution' is to CULL [IE: KILL OFF] - 15% , 25%, 50% , 90% of the World's Population... but few of you have the BALLS to say it out-right?!!!
FYI: Khadaffi's 'Great Man-Made River' Project = A REAL potential solution to the Problem of desertification & water reclamation...
Over emphasis on population control = a PHONY solution to these problems!
As long as one accepts the premise that "Profits and wealth creation" are a societies primary goal anc the entire rationale for human existence, this destruction will continue.
We have people advocating LESS Environmental regulation because it interferes with wealth creation and job creation and these people lead the polls in many nations the world over as far as popularity goes.
Destroying our sources of clean fresh water, and then having private industry PROVIDE the saame to us for a profit would seem an insane policy but it the exact one the countries of the world and this system we call Capitalism is following
re: overpopulation
If you're havin' trouble with your high school head/huh, huh, huh, huh
He's givin' you the blues/huh, huh, huh
You wanna graduate but not in 'is bed/huh, huh, huh, huh
Here's what you gotta do/huh, huh, huh
Pick up the phone, I'm always home/huh, huh, huh, huh, huh
Call me anytime/huh, huh, huh
Just ring: three-six-two-four-three-six, hey
I lead a life of crime
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds and they're done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds and they're done dirt cheap
You got problems in your life of love/huh, huh, huh, huh
You got a broken heart/huh, huh, huh
He's double-dealin' with your best friend/huh, huh, huh, huh, huh
That's when the teardrops start FELLA, well-uh/huh, huh, huh
Pick up the phone, I'm here alone/huh, huh, huh, huh, huh
Or make a social call/huh, huh, huh, huh
Come right in, forget about him
We'll have ourselves a ball, eh
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds and they're done dirt cheap, oohh
Dirty deeds and they're done dirt cheap
Whoa yeah
You got a lady and you want her gone/huh, huh, huh, huh
But you ain't got the guts/huh, huh, huh
She keeps naggin' at you night 'n' day/huh, huh, huh, huh
Enough to drive you nuts/huh, huh, huh, huh
Pick up the phone, leave her alone/huh, huh, huh, huh
It's time you made a stand/huh, huh, huh, huh
For a fee, I'm happy to be
Your back door man, hey
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds and they're done dirt cheap, yeah
Dirty deeds and they're done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds and they're done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds and they're done dirt cheap
Concrete shoes
Cyanide
T.N.T
Done dirt cheap
Ooo, neckties
Contracts
High voltage
Done dirt cheap, eah
Dirty deeds, do anything you want me to, done dirt cheap
Dirty deeds, dirty deeds, dirty deeds, done dirt cheap
Yaaagh
Overpopulation of the human species, is the driving force, of the degradation of the planet. Until this is addressed, all conservation is futile. Humans have to have water, food, energy and jobs. Until the humam spawing is reduced, there is no answer. Not their /our fault, just how it is.
As I understand it, a fundamental tenet of the Theory of Evolution is that more are born than can possibly survive.
We appear at this point to be in that position.
Manysummits
====
Gaia's antibodies are fighting the human plague
2 factors mitigate this broad assertion that there are too many people on Earth for its Carrying Capacity:
1 - Too few people control too much of the resources. We've all heard the statistics. Latest from Bernie Sanders, Independent from Vermont: 80% of the wealth generate in the US since 1975 has gone into the control of 1% of the population. The concept of Land Reform, giving land and resources back to local people to steward using organic small-scale local agriculture and forestry, fishing and desertification reversal, would do much to bring the Earth's carrying capacity back up to higher levels than the Industrial Era has plunged them to.
2 - Not only the numbers of people, but also each person's Ecological Footprint, must be considered. This could also be called Personal Energy Load or Resource Draw. Americans overall have the highest, 5% of the world population using 25% of the resources to maintain our industrialized lifestyles. Many more people can live and even thrive with far lower resource use, if their life ways were simpler, localer, more collective (mass transit), more efficient, lower tech and humbler. Of course, there are gradations within Americans, with some operating multiple homes, frequent private jet travel, opulent vacations, etc. But even the operation of a single car for each adult is an enormous resource draw when compared with the simpler life ways of many more localized people in the world.
Except that many of the world's peoples are aspiring to--and achieving--US 'standards'. While the world population is increasing, so is the average per-person resource use.
Strangely, some of us are reducing our resource use. Bicycle travel, local food purchasing, rainwater catchment, energy efficient housing, even personal energy generation and conservation, local investing, gift circles, give-aways, free boxes, wildcrafting and home gardening and... This is certainly not enough to offset the numbers of people hurtling toward '1st World' status, but it is something we can do to feel better about ourselves. Ironically, or perhaps understandably, it often makes for a more sane, healthier, slower, more relaxed, more fulfilling life--if we can get over any envy for those accruing more and more luxury.
And even stranger, laws, regulations and 'norms' are continually making this move toward lower resource use harder. Rising rents and other prices, falling value of currency (inflation), mandatory expenses, rising health care costs, and more, all pressure people to consume resources and run on the money mill just to stay in place. But it's not yet totally illegal not to buy some things (health insurance may soon be required by law), and there's still lots of opportunity to reduce resource use and be happier.
Meanwhile, others are running for the money and the things it can buy even faster. We would do well to learn how to live on less, but really Live more.